Wednesday, 24 February 2016 - 6:57pm

Error message

  • Deprecated function: The each() function is deprecated. This message will be suppressed on further calls in _menu_load_objects() (line 579 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/menu.inc).
  • Deprecated function: implode(): Passing glue string after array is deprecated. Swap the parameters in drupal_get_feeds() (line 394 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
Published by Matthew Davidson on Wed, 24/02/2016 - 6:57pm in

At the Campaign for America's Future, Dave Johnson has a comprehensive roundup of the Sanders “Economic Plan” Controversy. The controversy is practically non-existant outside of the left wing of the Republican Party, i.e. the Clinton/Obama/Clinton Democrats. The plan is pretty much what you'd expect from a New Dealer, as Chomsky characterises Sanders. It's a welcome change from policies that have created the post-GFC malaise, but hardly radical or historically unprecedented.

As you'd expect, economists with intelligence and integrity like Bill Black and Jamie Galbraith did their best to introduce some reason to public discourse, while journalists on the economics beat largely ignored tham and scrambled to stake out a position that they could defend as balanced. As you'd also expect, but nonetheless disappointingly, Paul Krugman lined up with those he would usually deride as Very Serious People (VSPs). I generally enjoy Krugman. He's witty and articulate, and performs a useful service against Republican politicians beloved of VSPs such as Ron Paul, Paul Ryan, Rand Paul, and Ryan Rand. (Hang on; I think one of those isn't a real person. Maybe more than one.)

Sadly, Krugman is not inclined to entertain ideas outside the range of opinions between Clinton and Bush, or if you prefer, Clinton and Bush (or Bush). And those issues upon which "moderate" Republicans and Democrats agree do not for Krugman count as contestable issues; they are part of the built-in political furniture. In this sense, he's as much a VSP as anybody. If he wasn't, he wouldn't be doing his job.

The New York Times' readership is the one percent. It makes sense therefore to maintain that real economic injustice is the work of the one-tenth of one percent. "It's not you, dear reader, it's those cads who buy the TImes but don't read my column who are to blame." Magnifying marginal distinctions, dismissing the significant, and excluding the challenging comes with the territory.

As a commentator, Krugman is a Jerry Seinfeld at a time which requires a Bill Hicks. In the second term of the Sanders presidency, I will be happy to read his wry observations about airline food and the latest crazy things Senator Ivanka Trump has been saying. In the meantime…